• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Pills in the Public’s Mind:RU 486 and the Framingof the Abortion Issue
Clyde Wilcox, Georgetown UniversityJulia Riches, Georgetown University
 ABSTRACT.
We investigate the sources of public attitudes toward RU486 to determine whether the drug will change public attitudes towardabortion. Not surprisingly, public attitudes toward RU 486 are influ-enced by the same factors that influence abortion opinion more gener-ally. Two other considerations seem to influence opinion toward RU486. First, the fact that the drug is administered early in pregnancy in-creases support, for many Americans take an emergent view of fetalrightsandopposeabortionsinthelastseveralmonthsofpregnancy.Sec-ond, opposition to the drug is highest among those who insist on consul-tation about the abortion decision, suggesting that at least some Americans fear that the drug will allow women to make hasty decisionsabout abortion without consulting family and friends. This latter findingsuggests that pro-choice advocates should emphasize that RU 486 is pre-scribed after consultation with a doctor.
 [ArticlecopiesavailableforafeefromTheHaworthDocumentDeliveryService:1-800-HAWORTH.E-mailaddress:<getinfo@haworthpressinc.com>Website:<http://www.HaworthPress.com>©2002byTheHaworthPress,Inc.Allrightsreserved.]
Few issues have been as fiercely contested in American politics asabortion.Thedebateoverabortionhasinspiredsomeordinarycitizensto engage in extraordinary politics–to pay attention to the positions of candidates and parties and even change party affiliation (Abramowitz
Women & Politics, Vol. 24(3) 2002http://www.haworthpressinc.com/store/product.asp?sku=J014
2002 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
61
 
1995; Adams 1997; Cook, Jelen, and Wilcox 1994), to give money, join groups, march and demonstrate, blockade abortion clinics and work to break those blockades, and even to engage in violence(Maxwell forthcoming). Verba, Schlozman, and Brady (1995) con-cluded that abortion represented one of the most powerful issue en-gagements in American politics, one that mobilized some citizens tobe considerably more active than their social characteristics wouldpredict. Abortion activists have sought to shape party platforms on the issue,to influence the choice of candidates, and even to write party rules tomake it easier for their forces to mobilize. For nearly 30 years, compet-ing sets of interest groups have sought to move public opinion as well.Both pro-choice and pro-life forces have struggled to define and framethe abortion issue in elections. Pro-choice groups such as NARAL (Na-tional Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League) and PlannedParenthood have conducted extensive research into public attitudes andspent millions of dollars in issue advocacy campaigns in recent years(Wilcox 2001). The Catholic Church hired Richard Wirthlin to do ex-ploratory research on ways to influence public attitudes (Cook, Jelen,and Wilcox 1992).Yet in spite of all of these efforts, public attitudes on abortion haveremained remarkably stable over the past 25 years, both in the aggre-gate and at the individual level. In the mid 1990s, many feminists be-lieved that RU 486 would be the technological breakthrough thatcould break the stalemate on abortion opinion, and lead many Ameri-canstothinkofabortioninanewlight.Ifwomencouldterminatetheirpregnancies in the privacy of their homes, and if women could choosethis medication in consultation with their physician, then it might bethat abortion would become less visible, and perhaps less publiclycontested. Moreover, the image in the public mind of abortion wouldchange–from asurgical procedureperformed in aclinicby aspecialist while many demonstrators protest outside, to a miscarriage induced athome.How likely is it that RU 486 can break the public opinion stalemateon abortion? In this paper, we will examine public opinion on RU 486,and speculate about the impact of the availability of the drug on publicopinion on abortion. Our analysis will be necessarily speculative, for,although many Americans answer survey questions about the drug, it islikely that many know little about it. Before we can understand thesources of opinion toward RU 486, however, it is first important to un-derstand public opinion on abortion. It is important to understand why
62WOMEN & POLITICS
 
abortion opinion is stable in order to assess how RU 486 might affectthat stability.
 DATA
The data for this study come from three sources. For longitudinaltrends in abortion opinion we use the General Social Survey (GSS), alargeomnibussurveyconductedannuallyorbiannuallybytheNationalOpinion Research Center. The GSS routinely includes six items asking whether abortion should be legal if a woman’s health is in danger, if thefetus is severely defective, if the pregnancy is the result of rape, if thefamily is too poor to support additional children, if a married woman issingle and does not wish to marry, or if a married couple wants no morechildren. Respondents can approve or disapprove each of these circum-stancesindependently,andfromtheseitemswehaveconstructedanad-ditive scale ranging from 0 (disapproves in all circumstances) to 6(approves for all six circumstances).Most of the analysis below will be based on data collected by the
 Los AngelesTimes
in a national telephone poll conducted in June 2000 (n =2071). We will also briefly refer to an earlier
 LosAngelesTimes
pollconducted in 1989 (n = 3583, with an oversample of women). Both sur-veys contained a rich array of questions on abortion, and asked onequestion on RU 486. From the 1989 survey we will merely mention thedistributionofopiniononRU486,butwewillbasethebulkofouranal-ysis on the more recent 2000 survey, which was conducted during atime when the drug was somewhat more visible in the public eye.The 2000 survey included five items modeled after those in the GSS:Should abortion beallowed whenthephysical health ofthemother isindanger, when her emotional health is in danger, when the pregnancy isthe result of rape, when the fetus is severely defective, and when thefamilycansupportnomorechildren.Wehavecreatedanadditiveindexfrom these items, ranging from 0 to 5. Note that the
 LosAngelesTimes
batterydidnotincludethetwoitemsthatreceivetheleastsupportintheGSS–abortionsforunmarriedwomenandformarriedcouplesthatwantno more children–and instead includes one question on emotionalhealth.Inaddition,the
 LosAngelesTimes
pollaskedaseriesofmoregeneralquestions about abortion. The first asked when abortion should be legalandofferedthreeoptions:abortionshouldalwaysbelegal,shouldbele-gal for rape, incest, fetal defect, and mother’s health but for no other
Clyde Wilcox and Julia Riches63
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...